The Synoptic ones you mean? That's why they are called synoptic, they are harmonized. John's Gospel, on the other hand, is nothing like the other three. Night and day. And even then there are some serious discrepancies among them. Also, Luke's Gospel exists in two versions, long and short.
As far as I understand the issue, yes. Everyone agrees that the Father sent the Son, and there is no issue of subordination
Or co-equality? Even when Jesus says the Father is greater than I?
Why then would there arise an issue over whether the Holy Spirit "proceeded" from the Father alone or the Father and Son? Either way, there should still be no issue of subordination. Whatever the precise meaning of "proceeded" is, I wouldn't think it would infringe on the Three being co-eternal and co-equal.
Where does the Bible says all three are co-equal and co-eternal? And the origin of the Spirit is of utmost importance in the Triniatrian dogma.
For if the Son is begotten of the Father and the Spirit is something that "comes" out of both of them, then then the cause of the Spirit are both the Father and the Son and you have double cause. How is the Spirit co-equal then?
The Spirit doesn't have everyhting the Father has, as the Son does. The spiration and the begotteness, on the other hand, point to Father as the first cause (even if eternal) of everything and all, including the Godhead, and only the Father is uncaused.
Or co-equality? Even when Jesus says the Father is greater than I?
Jesus also says that He and the Father are One and that he who sees Him also sees the Father.
Where does the Bible says all three are co-equal and co-eternal?
The earlier website shows that there is one God (or just use 1 Cor. 8:4) and that the Father, Son, and Spirit are all God. Genesis shows that God is eternal.
For if the Son is begotten of the Father and the Spirit is something that "comes" out of both of them, then then the cause of the Spirit are both the Father and the Son and you have double cause. How is the Spirit co-equal then?
From what I have been able to discover there is great controversy over what "begotten" means. For me it is enough to know that all three are co-eternal and co-equal. The idea of them fulfilling different roles would not disturb this, but I can see trouble arising when trying to establish that the Father is somehow greater. I don't need to go there and don't understand why it is so important to some other Christians. Apparently, it is a HUGE deal between the Orthodox and Latins, but I have never heard the issue come up a single time as a point of discussion in the 22 years I have been going to my church.
The Spirit doesn't have everything the Father has, as the Son does.
This is exactly the kind of statement that makes no sense to me as it has God lacking something. I have never understood that to be a Christian idea.